Portal Vein Recanalization Research Articles

What is the place of portal vein recanalisation in the management of non-cirrhotic portal hypertension?

What is the place of portal vein recanalisation in the management of non-cirrhotic portal hypertension?

Transjugular mesenteric-caval shunt for portal vein cavernous transformation with recurrent variceal bleeding: preliminary results.

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the transjugular mesenteric-caval shunt (TMCS) as a treatment for the cavernous transformation of the portal vein (CTPV) and recurrent variceal bleeding. This retrospective case series was conducted with approval from the institutional review board. It involved seven patients diagnosed with CTPV and recurrent variceal bleeding who underwent the TMCS procedure. We analyzed the rate of procedural complications, incidents of rebleeding, stent stenosis, hepatic encephalopathy, and overall survival to assess treatment outcomes. The TMCS was successfully performed in all seven patients without any life-threatening complications. Postoperatively, one patient developed a lung infection and pleural effusion, which resolved with appropriate treatment. Additionally, two patients experienced an increase in total bilirubin levels, but there was no further deterioration in liver function. The median portal pressure gradient significantly decreased from a preoperative value of 27 mmHg (range 20-36 mmHg) to a postoperative value of 6 mmHg (range 4-11 mmHg). A notable improvement was observed in one cirrhotic patient, with liver function progressing from Child-Pugh class B (score 9) to class A (score 6). Over a median follow-up period of 14 months (range 7-18 months), none of the patients encountered rebleeding, stent stenosis, hepatic encephalopathy, or mortality. The TMCS appears to be a viable and effective alternative for managing CTPV with recurrent variceal bleeding. Its long-term outcome requires further evaluation. TMCS provides a promising treatment for patients with life-threatening CTPV complications when occluded portal vein cannot be recanalized and portal vein recanalization TIPS is not an option. Performing TIPS in patients with portal vein cavernoma is complex due to the requirement for recanalization of the occluded portal vein. Creating a mesenteric-caval shunt through a transjugular approach is a feasible technique. Establishing a TMCS provides a means to manage life-threatening complications arising from portal vein cavernoma.

Preventing variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Preventing rebleeding is crucial, but the best prevention technique for patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) remains debatable. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis compared a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) with endoscopic therapy (ET) plus nonselective beta-blockers (NSBBs) for preventing variceal rebleeding in this patient population. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from their inception until May 18, 2023. The studies were screened using predetermined criteria, relevant data were extracted, and pooled analyses were performed using the Reviewer Manager 5.4.1 software. We retrieved 1032 studies, of which 5 studies comprising a total of 272 patients were included. The postoperative variceal rebleeding rate was significantly lower in the TIPS group than in the ET+NSBBs group (odds ratio [OR]=0.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.11-0.35, P<0.05, I2=0%), but the portal vein recanalization rate was higher (OR=7.92, 95% CI=3.04-20.67, P<0.05, I2=0%). The rates of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and mortality did not differ between the groups. Our results suggest that TIPS prevents variceal rebleeding without increasing the hepatic encephalopathy risk more effectively than ET plus NSBBs, but this benefit did not translate into improved survival. Thus, it may be preferable to ET plus NSBBs for preventing variceal rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis and PVT. However, more large-scale and multicenter randomized controlled trials involving other patient populations are required to verify the clinical efficacy of both these treatments and ensure generalizability.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS) Extension for Transhepatic Mesocaval Shunt Creation: A Case Series for Treating Refractory Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients with Chronic Portal Vein Thrombosis.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is known to benefit patients with decompensated liver disease by alleviating portal pressure. However, TIPS creation is technically difficult and challenging to perform in patients with chronic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) (4,5). Multiple endovascular techniques for portal vein recanalization with or without creating portosystemic shunt are available to decompress and alleviate portal hypertension in patients with PVT. In this case series, we represent TIPS extension to create an endovascular mesocaval shunt for the treatment of refractory upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Role of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Portal Vein Tumor Thrombosis in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Prospective Single Institute Experience

Patients diagnosed with Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) complicated with portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) have a limited number of treatment options available and are associated with an overall poor prognosis. With the recent developments in the field of radiation therapy, the role of radiotherapy particularly Stereotactic Body radiotherapy (SBRT) has increased as a loco-regional therapy for HCC. This study was planned to evaluate the role of SBRT in Locally advanced HCC complicated with PVTT and its role as loco-regional therapy. We conducted a prospective study that included patients diagnosed with HCC complicated with PVTT Child-Turcotte Pugh (CTP) Class A/B with a maximum score of 7, diagnosed on triple phase Contrast-Enhanced - MRI unsuitable for other ablative procedures. Patients with Bilirubin levels > 4 mg/dl, active Hepatitis, CTP score >7, normal liver volume <700cc or history of prior radiotherapy were excluded from the study. Patients underwent a contrast enhanced 4D-CT simulation with abdominal compression and were planned for SBRT using VMAT technique. Patients were followed-up as per Institute protocol. CECT or MRI for a radiological response was done for response assessment using mRECIST criteria version 1.1. A baseline MRI was done at one-month post-SBRT to understand any RT changes in the liver and to differentiate from tumor progression during the response assessment at three months. A total of 22 patients with HCC were recruited and received SBRT to PVTT, with a dosage between 30-42 Gy over 6 fractions treated on alternate days. Patients were assessed post-treatment with triphasic CE-MRI every 3 months as per institute protocol. Five patients had achieved Complete response in form of Portal vein recanalization. Three patients had Partial response to the treatment. Seven patients maintained stable disease status whereas six patients had disease progression during the entire course of treatment. The response rate (CR+PR) to treatment was 36.3% at the time of analysis. The Overall Response rate (CR+PR+SD) was 69%. No grade 3 or 4 toxicities were observed and treatment was tolerated well by patients. Kaplan-Meier method was applied to calculate the survival probability at various follow-up intervals. The median time for overall survival was 25 months ((95% CI: 15-35). Out of the 22 subjects included in the study, 6 patients died. There was a 78% survival probability at 12 months and a 68% survival probability at 18 months of follow-up. This prospective single-arm study demonstrated the vital role of SBRT in the treatment of Hepatocellular carcinoma with Portal vein tumor thrombosis and its efficacy in terms of achieving excellent local control with relatively lesser toxicities compared with existing treatment modalities. Patients have shown benefit post-treatment in terms of thrombus reduction and restoration of Portal vein flow making them suitable for further treatment like Resection or TACE.

Recanalization of portal vein thrombosis after pediatric liver transplantation: Efficacy and safety of the transsplenic access.

Endovascular management of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is challenging. Transsplenic access (TSA) is growing as an access option to the portal system but with higher rates of bleeding complications. The aim of this article is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transsplenic portal vein recanalization (PVR) using a metallic stent after pediatric liver transplantation. This is a retrospective review of 15 patients with chronic PVT who underwent PVR via TSA between February 2016 and December 2020. Two children who had undergone catheterization of a mesenteric vein tributary by minilaparotomy were excluded from the patency analysis but included in the splenic access analysis. The technical and clinical success of PVR and complications related to the procedure via TSA were evaluated. Thirteen children with PVT were treated primarily using the TSA. The mean age was 4.1 years (range, 1.5-13.7 years), and the most common clinical presentation was hypersplenism (60%). Technically successful PVR was performed in 11/13 (84.6%) children, and clinical success was achieved in 9/11 (81.8%) children. No major complications were observed, and one child presented moderate pain in the TSA (from a total of 17 TSA). The median follow-up was 48.2 months. The median primary patency was 9.9 months. Primary patency in the first 4 years was 75%, and primary assisted patency was 100% in the follow-up period. Transsplenic PVR is a safe and effective method for the treatment of PVT after pediatric liver transplantation.

THE SURGEON'S PERSPECTIVE ON PORTAL VEIN THROMBOSIS IN PATIENTS WITH LIVER CIRRHOSIS

The article discusses the key aspects of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis. The prevalence of portal vein thrombosis in individuals with liver cirrhosis ranges from 0.6 % to 26 %, with a higher incidence observed in those with decompensated cirrhosis. Symptoms of portal vein thrombosis are often nonspecific. Approximately one-third of patients with this condition experience no symptoms, and the detection of a thrombus is usually an incidental finding during computed tomography or ultrasound examinations.&#x0D; Acute portal vein thrombosis is characterized by abdominal pain in the right upper quadrant, non-bloody diarrhea, or acute intestinal obstruction when there is symptomatic dilatation of the superior mesenteric vein. On the other hand, chronic portal vein thrombosis manifests through signs of portal hypertension, such as esophageal and gastric bleeding, deterioration of portal gastropathy, splenomegaly, pancytopenia, and significant ascites.&#x0D; The first-line treatment for portal vein thrombosis involves the use of direct and indirect anticoagulants. However, their administration necessitates careful consideration of the risk of intraluminal bleeding, the severity of cirrhosis, and the potential benefits of portal vein recanalization. Mechanical thrombectomy can serve as an alternative to long-term anticoagulant therapy for portal vein thrombosis. In cases of portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis, after mechanical thrombectomy and thrombolysis, the placement of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is often performed.&#x0D; To conclude, portal vein thrombosis frequently occurs in patients with liver cirrhosis, and its appearance is challenging to predict due to its multifactorial nature. The preferred initial treatment for acute portal vein thrombosis, in the absence of intraluminal bleeding or intestinal ischemia, involves the use of direct and indirect anticoagulants. Minimally invasive surgical options, such as mechanical thrombectomy, chemical thrombolysis, and TIPS placement (with or without variceal embolization), are currently available. However, due to the heterogeneous nature of the existing data and the lack of randomized controlled trials, definitive recommendations regarding the optimal treatment strategy are not yet available.&#x0D; Keywords: cirrhosis, coagulopathy, portal hypertension, portal vein thrombosis, anticoagulants.

Portal vein thrombosis: Before, during, and after liver transplant.

Portal vein thrombosis: Before, during, and after liver transplant.

Portal Vein Recanalization–Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (PVR-TIPS) with superior mesenteric vein access and balloon-assisted shunt placement

BackgroundTo report the technique and outcome of ultrasound-guided percutaneous access to the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) for balloon-assisted portal vein recanalization–transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS) in a patient with chronic portal venous and splenic vein occlusion.Case presentationA 51-year-old, non-cirrhotic patient with severe portal hypertension was admitted for PVR-TIPS. Neither splenic nor hepatic access was feasible due to chronic portal and splenic vein occlusion. Percutaneous ultrasound-guided direct puncture of the SMV was performed to obtain access for balloon-assisted PVR-TIPS. The transmesenteric approach in combination with a balloon puncture technique for PVR-TIPS was successful, and no immediate complications were observed post-procedure. The subsequent follow-up exams showed patent TIPS and SMV without signs of intraabdominal hemorrhage.ConclusionPercutaneous ultrasound-guided superior mesenteric vein access for balloon-assisted PVR-TIPS is a feasible option in cases where hepatic or splenic access is not.

Safety and Efficacy of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt for Non-tumoral Cirrhotic Portal Vein Thrombosis Not Responding to Anticoagulation Therapy.

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of add-on transjugular-intrahepatic-portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for portal vein recanalization (PVR) in cirrhotic patients with non-tumoral chronic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) after 6months of monitored anticoagulation therapy (ACT). We conducted a retrospective search of the hospital database for patients who underwent TIPS for persistent PVT despite 6months of ACT (January 2011 to August 2021). These patients were compared to control group (ACT group; no TIPS but continued on ACT). Post-TIPS periodic assessment was done to look for clinical outcome, PVR (using contrast-enhanced CT scan), and complications. A total of 90 patients were analyzed. Thirty-six patients in TIPS group and 54 patients in ACT group. TIPS was successfully performed in all patients. TIPS group showed complete recanalization of portal vein in 77.8%, partial recanalization in 16.7%, and stable thrombus in 5.5% of the patients. TIPS thrombosis was seen in 3 patients, all underwent successful endovascular thrombolysis. Seven patients developed post-TIPS hepatic encephalopathy and were managed conservatively. In contrast, no patient in ACT group achieved PVR on 12-month follow-up. After propensity score matching, patients in TIPS group showed significantly lower incidence of variceal re-bleeding (22.2% vs. 77.8%, p = 0.03) and refractory ascites (11.1% vs. 51.9%, p < 0.01) with significantly better 12-month survival as compared to ACT group (88.9% vs. 69.4%, p = 0.04). TIPS in cirrhotic patients with PVT result in superior recanalization rates, better control of ascites, and variceal re-bleeding resulting in better survival. TIPS may be considered a preferred therapy after anticoagulation failure. TIPS is associated with good technical and clinical success in patients of cirrhosis with PVT and should be considered in patients not responding to ACT.

Transjugular intrahepatic collateral-systemic shunt is effective for cavernous transformation of the portal vein with variceal bleeding

BackgroundThe transjugular intrahepatic portal collateral-systemic shunt (transcollateral TIPS) is used to treat portal hypertension-related complications in patients with cavernous transformation of the portal vein (CTPV) and whose main portal vein cannot be recanalized. It is still not clear whether transcollateral TIPS can be as effective as portal vein recanalization–transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR–TIPS). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcollateral TIPS in the treatment of refractory variceal bleeding with CTPV.MethodsPatients with refractory variceal bleeding caused by CTPV were selected from the database of consecutive patients treated with TIPS in Xijing Hospital from January 2015 to March 2022. They were divided into the transcollateral TIPS group and the PVR–TIPS group. The rebleeding rate, overall survival, shunt dysfunction, overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE) and operation-related complications were analyzed.ResultsA total of 192 patients were enrolled, including 21 patients with transcollateral TIPS and 171 patients with PVR–TIPS. Compared with the patients with PVR–TIPS, the patients with transcollateral TIPS had more noncirrhosis (52.4 vs. 19.9%, p = 0.002), underwent fewer splenectomies (14.3 vs. 40.9%, p = 0.018), and had more extensive thromboses (38.1 vs. 15.2%, p = 0.026). There were no differences in rebleeding, survival, shunt dysfunction, or operation-related complication rates between the transcollateral TIPS and PVR–TIPS groups. However, the OHE rate was significantly lower in the transcollateral TIPS group (9.5 vs. 35.1%, p = 0.018).ConclusionTranscollateral TIPS is an effective treatment for CTPV with refractory variceal bleeding.

Portal Vein Thrombosis in the Setting of Cirrhosis: A Comprehensive Review.

Portal vein thrombosis constitutes the most common thrombotic event in patients with cirrhosis, with increased rates in the setting of advanced liver disease. Despite being a well-known complication of cirrhosis, the contribution of portal vein thrombosis to hepatic decompensation and overall mortality is still a matter of debate. The incorporation of direct oral anticoagulants and new radiological techniques for portal vein recanalization have expanded our therapeutic arsenal. However, the lack of large prospective observational studies and randomized trials explain the heterogenous diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations of current guidelines. This article seeks to make a comprehensive review of the pathophysiology, clinical features, diagnosis, and treatment of portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis.

S1204 A Case Series of Combined Portal Vein Recanalization and Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Placement in Cirrhotic Patients

S1204 A Case Series of Combined Portal Vein Recanalization and Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Placement in Cirrhotic Patients

Interventional Radiology Management of Adult Liver Transplant Complications.

Liver transplant remains the definitive therapy for patients with end-stage liver disease. Outcomes have continued to improve, in part owing to interventions used to treat posttransplant complications involving the hepatic arteries, portal vein, hepatic veins or inferior vena cava (IVC), and biliary system. Significant hepatic artery stenosis can be treated with angioplasty or stent placement to prevent thrombosis and biliary ischemic complications. Hepatic arterioportal fistula and hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm are rare complications that can often be treated with endovascular means. Treatment of hepatic artery thrombosis can have mixed results. Portal vein stenosis can be treated with venoplasty or more commonly stent placement. The rarer portal vein thrombosis can also be treated with endovascular techniques. Hepatic venous outflow stenosis of the hepatic veins or IVC is amenable to venoplasty or stent placement. Complications of the bile ducts are the most encountered complication after liver transplant. When not amenable to endoscopic intervention, biliary stricture, bile leak, and ischemic cholangiopathy can be treated with percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography with biliary drainage and other interventions. New techniques have further improved care for these patients. Transsplenic portal vein recanalization has improved transplant candidacy for patients with chronic portal vein thrombosis. Spontaneous splenorenal shunt and splenic artery steal syndrome (nonocclusive hepatic artery hypoperfusion syndrome) remain complicated topics, and the role of endovascular embolization is developing. When patients have recurrence of cirrhosis after transplant, most commonly due to viral hepatitis, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) may be required to treat symptoms of portal hypertension. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ©RSNA, 2022.

Successful treatment of acute symptomatic extensive portal venous system thrombosis by 7-day systemic thrombolysis.

Acute portal venous system thrombosis (PVST) can cause acute mesenteric ischemia and even intestinal infarction, which are potentially fatal, and requires recanalization in a timely fashion. Herein, we report a 56-year-old man with acute non-cirrhotic symptomatic extensive PVST who achieved portal vein recanalization after systemic thrombolysis combined with anticoagulation. Initially, anticoagulation with enoxaparin sodium for 4 d was ineffective, and then systemic thrombolysis for 7 d was added. After that, his abdominal pain completely disappeared, and portal vein system vessels became gradually patent. Long-term anticoagulation therapy was maintained. In conclusion, 7-d systemic thrombolysis may be an effective and safe choice of treatment for acute symptomatic extensive PVST which does not respond to anticoagulation therapy.

Portal vein recanalisation alone to treat severe portal hypertension in non-cirrhotic patients with chronic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction

Background & AimsWe aimed to evaluate long-term outcome of patients with chronic non-cirrhotic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (CNC-EHPVO) who underwent portal vein recanalisation (PVR) without transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) insertion and to determine factors predicting PVR failure and stent occlusion.MethodsThis retrospective monocentric study included all patients who underwent PVR without TIPS insertion in the context of CNC-EHPVO between the years 2000 and 2019. Primary patency was defined by the absence of a complete stent occlusion on follow-up imaging.ResultsA total of 31 patients underwent PVR with a median follow-up of 52 months (24–82 months). Indications were gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 13), abdominal pain attributed to CNC-EHPVO (n = 7), prior to abdominal surgery (n = 4), and others (n = 7). Technical success was obtained in 27 patients. PVR failure was associated with extension within the intrahepatic portal veins (p = 0.005) and recanalisation for abdominal pain (p = 0.02). Adverse events occurred in 6 patients with no mortality. Anticoagulation was administered in 21 patients after technical success of PVR. In patients with technical success, 5-year primary patency was 73% and was associated with improved muscle mass (p = 0.007) and decreased spleen volume (p = 0.01) at 1 year. Furthermore, 21 (78%) patients with PVR technical success were free of portal hypertension complication at 5 years.ConclusionsPVR without TIPS insertion was feasible and safe in selected patients with CNC-EHPVO and portal hypertension with past or expected complications. Primary patency at 5 years was obtained in 3 of 4 patients with technical success of PVR and was associated with a control of complications of CNC-EHPVO. PVR was associated with improvement of sarcopenia and decreased spleen volume at 1 year.Lay summaryPatients with chronic obstruction of the portal vein and without cirrhosis or malignancy can develop complications related to the high pressure in the venous system. The present study reports long-term favourable outcome of patients in whom the obstruction was treated with stents.

Liver Transplantation After Acute Portal Vein Thrombosis: Case Report

Portal vein thrombosis is a relatively frequent complication in patients with liver cirrhosis. Its detection and management are essential to avoid worsening portal hypertension or liver function complications. This complication can also negatively impact or even preclude liver transplant. We report the case of a patient who presented with acute portal vein thrombosis, which allowed the diagnosis of liver cirrhosis and hepatocarcinoma within the Milan criteria. Chemical thrombolysis was performed with a mechanical aspiration of the thrombus, and in a second moment, the patient was submitted to a liver transplant. Advances in the therapeutic approach to portal vein thrombosis and surgical techniques have allowed the condition to no longer be an absolute contraindication to liver transplantation. Diagnosis in the acute phase is associated with greater therapeutic success, aiming to avoid the extension of thrombosis and achieve portal vein recanalization.

Commentary on Percutaneous Trans-splenic Balloon-Assisted Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Placement in Patients with Portal Vein Obliteration for Portal Vein Recanalization: Feasibility, Safety and Effectiveness.

Commentary on Percutaneous Trans-splenic Balloon-Assisted Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Placement in Patients with Portal Vein Obliteration for Portal Vein Recanalization: Feasibility, Safety and Effectiveness.

Preoperative portal vein recanalization-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for chronic obliterative portal vein thrombosis: Outcomes following liver transplantation.

High‐grade portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is often considered to be a technically challenging scenario for liver transplantation (LT) and in some centers a relative contraindication. This study compares patients with chronic obliterative PVT who underwent portal vein recanalization–transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR‐TIPS) and subsequent LT to those with partial nonocclusive PVT who underwent LT without an intervention. This institutional review board‐approved study analyzed 49 patients with cirrhosis with PVT from 2000 to 2020 at our institution. Patients were divided into two groups, those that received PVR‐TIPS due to anticipated surgical challenges from chronic obliterative PVT and those who did not because of partial PVT. Demographic data and long‐term outcomes were compared. A total of 35 patients received PVR‐TIPS while 14 did not, with all receiving LT. Patients with PVR‐TIPS had a higher Yerdel score and frequency of cavernoma than those that did not. PVR‐TIPS was effective in decreasing portosystemic gradient (16 down to 8 mm HG; p < 0.05). Both groups allowed for end‐to‐end anastomoses in >90% of cases. However, veno–veno bypass was used significantly more in patients who did not receive PVR‐TIPS. Additionally, patients without PVR‐TIPS required significantly more intraoperative red blood cells. Overall survival was not different between groups. PVR‐TIPS demonstrated efficacy in resolving PVT and allowed for end‐to‐end portal vein anastomoses. PVR‐TIPS is a viable treatment option for chronic obliterative PVT with or without cavernoma that simplifies the surgical aspects of LT.

Percutaneous radiological interventions of the portal vein: a comprehensive review.

The portal vein is the largest vessel supplying the liver. A number of radiological interventions are performed through the portal vein, namely for primary pathologies of the portal vein, for inducing liver hypertrophy or to treat the sequelae of portal hypertension among others. The routes used include direct transhepatic, transjugular, and, uncommonly, trans-splenic and through subcutaneous varices. Portal vein embolization and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt are among the most common portal vein interventions that are performed to induce hypertrophy of the future liver remnant and to treat complications of portal hypertension, respectively. Other interventions include transhepatic obliteration of varices and shunts, portal vein thrombolysis, portal vein recanalization, pancreatic islet cell transplantation, and embolization of portal vein injuries. We present a detailed illustrative review of the various radiological portal vein interventions.